User:Dans/sandbox4

The migration crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina started in early 2018, as parte of the wider European migrant crisis. Following the closure of onward routes to Hungary and Croatia, migrants in Serbia started to move towards Bosnia and Herzegovina, to then move via Croatia and Slovenia with further destinations Vienna and Trieste.

Situation by 2018
Bosnia and Herzegovina adopted in 2015 and 2016 respectively a Law on Foreigners and Law on Asylum, broadly in line with the EU acquis.

The Ministry of Security of Bosnia and Herzegovina (MoS) includes a Sector for Asylum (SA) and a Service for Foreigners Affairs (SFA), with operational autonomy. The Border Police of Bosnia and Herzegovina is also under the political responsibility of the same ministry. These bodies are all understaffed, some severely (21.3% vacant positions in the Border Police by end 2017), also due to the moratorium on employment in State-level institutions.

An Asylum Centre in Delijas (near Sarajevo) holds 154 beds (which can be expanded to 300), but it is underutilised due to its remote location and lack of basic services, including internet access and public transport. Bosnia and Herzegovina has not recognised any person with refugee status from 2014 till 2019. In 2017, 380 people applied for international protection, out of which 8 people were granted the status of subsidiary protection, 15 applications by 15 individuals were rejected on merit, and 143 applications by 167 individuals were closed as the applicants left or attempted to leave the country or failed to show up for an interview. Bosnia and Herzegovina does not have a cooperation agreement with the European Asylum Support Office (EASO).

Bosnia and Herzegovina has an Immigration Detention Centre, in East Sarajevo (Lukavica), built with EU funds in 2008-10 and managed by the Ministry of Security. It is used to hold persons awaiting expulsion to their countries of origin. Bosnia and Herzegovina has concluded readmission agreements with the EU (since 2008) and with all Western Balkan countries (except Kosovo) and Turkey, as well as implementation protocols with 14 EU Member States.

Developments in 2018
Until 2018, Bosnia and Herzegovina had remained at the margins of the migration route that had crossed North Macedonia and Serbia, and then Croatia, from 2015 to 2017. Only 218 persons had been intercepted while irregularly crossing into the country in 2016, and 767 in 2017. In 2018, the number of people detected while irregularly crossing the border was 23,977, some 100 times the amount of 2016. Pakistan, Iran and Syria are overall top-three declared countries of origin. To provide them with shelter, temporary accommodation centres were set in 2018 up with EU funds, notably in the Una-Sana Canton and to a lesser extent in the Sarajevo Canton, providing accommodation to around 4,000 persons, among which 30% are families with children, 10% are unaccompanied/separated children, and 1% are single women. By end 2018, around 6,400 migrants and refugees were present in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In March 2019, the Council of Ministers decided to take over the responsibility of the reception facilities in the Una-Sana Canton. However, this decision has not been implemented.

The response to the increased migratory influx revealed significant institutional weaknesses and lack of coordination among levels of government. The Ministry of Security failed to ensure effective coordination and provide adequate border surveillance, registration and identification of migrants. The issue has been exacerbated by the lack of proper risk analysis, crime intelligence and exchange of biometric data.

Political inaction and negative rhetoric undermined the timely provision of assistance, primarily in the areas of access to asylum procedure, provision of accommodation and basic services in line with international standards, and access to healthcare. The Ministry of Security and the coordination body on migration proved unable to enforce its decisions and to allocate suitable premises for reception centres and relocate asylum seekers and migrants, thus alleviating the burden on the most affected areas.

The authorities of the Una-Sana Canton have introduced restriction on the number of migrants in the canton and, as reported by international organisations, have been conducting forced disembarkation of migrants at the cantonal borders and restricted their movements. In several cases, the authorities did not allow accommodating migrants and asylum seekers in the established facilities, thus leading to significant protection risks.

There are reports of violent collective expulsion of migrants and asylum seekers back into Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The number of third-country nationals returned to Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2018 under various readmission agreements was 652 compared with 324 in 2017. In 2018, Bosnia and Herzegovina authorities returned 670 foreign citizens compared with 358 in 2017. Return mechanisms to the countries of origin require additional improvement, especially regarding voluntary return of foreign nationals from Bosnia and Herzegovina. In this respect, the country has been repeatedly encouraged to conclude bilateral readmission agreements with the main countries of origin of irregular migrants.

In the context of the increased migratory flow, the implementation of the readmission agreements with neighbouring countries concerning third-country nationals has been challenging. According to official data 450 persons were readmitted from Bosnia and Herzegovina to Serbia (275 through regular procedure and 175 through accelerated procedure), while 193 persons were admitted from Bosnia Herzegovina to Montenegro (143 through regular procedure and 50 through accelerated procedure).

In 2018, the authorities registered 22,499 asylum intents, while only 1,567 persons chose or managed to apply for asylum. This compares with 381 persons who lodged applications for international protection in 2017. In 2018, 475 applications by 659 individuals were closed with 2 applications by 4 individuals were granted the status of subsidiary protection whilst 473 applications by 655 individuals were rejected on merit or discontinued as the applicants left or attempted to leave the country or failed to show up for an interview. The remaining 482 applications by 909 individuals were still being processed at the end of 2018. There have been no refugee status recognitions since 2014. The Asylum Centre, managed by the Sector for Asylum of the Ministry of Security, remained underutilised in spite of the increased influx of asylum seekers, mainly due to its remote location and poor access.

There are serious obstacles to an effective access to asylum procedures. The Asylum Department has very limited human resource and operational capacities, which are inadequate to address the increased influx of asylum seekers and ensure access to the asylum procedure including in the area of the countries were most asylum seekers are present. There is in particular an insufficient number of registration sites and interviewers. Interpretation services are mainly based on outsourcing agreements. There is also a lack of cultural mediators. Staff needs to be better trained to ensure the respect of international standards and procedural safeguards. The implementation of the asylum legislation needs to be improved, in particular to ensure the systematic respect of procedural guarantees for asylum-seekers. The enjoyment of rights of asylum seekers is uneven across the country, as the access to services varies depending on the centres’ location. The access to asylum procedures and mechanisms should be strengthened to ensure faster processing of claims and provide persons in need with international protection. As the authorities have not yet taken over the legal responsibility for the reception centres in the Una-Sana Canton, these are not recognised as valid residential addresses for asylum applications. Consequently, the applicants fall in a legal limbo, which entails significant protection risks.

Capacities of all border management agencies are insufficient due to the lack of appropriate infrastructure and human and technical resources. Border police has around 400 vacant positions, amounting to around 14% of its personnel capacity. In particular, more personnel needs to be recruited in the areas of border surveillance, border checks, identification and registration. Border checks satisfy minimum standards. There is a need for additional technical and human resources for improving the quality of border checks.

Border Surveillance resources are very limited and require substantial improvements. The supervision of the green borders (outside the border crossing points) is not effective. The number of border patrols is insufficient also in view of the length of the border. Risk analysis led border surveillance requires further improvement.

The training curriculum of the Border Police is not yet fully harmonised with the common core curriculum of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (EBCGA). Cooperation with European Border and Coast Guard Agency (EBCGA) and implementation of the working agreement signed in 2009 are satisfactory. Negotiations on a model status agreement between Bosnia and Herzegovina and the EU on the EBCGA have been concluded, but the agreement has not yet been signed.

On international cooperation, Bosnia and Herzegovina has a number of agreements with neighbouring countries, including on joint patrols, joint cooperation centres and local border traffic. The Joint Centre for Police Cooperation with Serbia and Montenegro in Trebinje is in function, but with limited capacity. There is also a Joint Contact Centre with Croatia. Local border traffic agreements are operational with Croatia, Montenegro and Serbia. Locations suitable for illegally crossing the border with Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro have been closed. The 2016 border agreement with Montenegro is implemented smoothly.

Some measures are in place to fight corruption on the border, in particular video surveillance systems on all border crossings and a free hotline for citizens’ complaints for reporting corruption cases. However, more efforts are needed to achieve concrete results. Crisis response mechanisms related to border control are weak and require significant improvements.

Developments in 2019
In 2019, the authorities detected 29,302 migrants on the border or through in-land activities, compared to 23,977 in 2018. Overall, the top three declared countries of origin were Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq. By late August 2020, approximately 10,000 migrants and asylum seekers were present in the country. Some 6,500 are sheltered in 7 EU-funded temporary reception centres in the Una-Sana and Sarajevo cantons. However,facilities remain insufficient to ensure shelter and protection to those in need.

As a consequence of the inefficient inter-institutional coordination, since June 2019 the local authorities in Una-Sana Canton have introduced restrictions on the maximum number of migrants in the canton, and have been forcibly deporting migrants and refugees to the unsuitable location of Vučjak. Following constant advocacy, the Vučjak site was closed in December 2019 and the approximately 700 persons present there were relocated to a new facility opened in Blažuj near Sarajevo with EU assistance.

Una-Sana cantonal authorities have repeatedly attempted to prevent the entry of migrants and refugees in the canton by restricting freedom of movement or not allowing them to access reception facilities, leading to significant protection risks, in particular for the most vulnerable ones. These counterproductive actions, coupled with reports of police violence as well as intimidation of humanitarian partners, also stretched the scarce resources available to cope with the humanitarian needs. Further restrictions were introduced in August 2020.

Crisis response during the COVID-19 outbreak was overall satisfactory, preventing a larger spread and more severe consequences for the migrant population. An emergency tent camp in Lipa near Bihać was opened in April 2020 as a preventive measure to provide essential hygiene and health services and reduce vulnerability to COVID-19 for around 1,000 persons staying outside accommodation centres in the Una-Sana Canton. By end August, it accommodates 1,500 persons. Humanitarian partners are present to implement the EU financial assistance and to monitor that international standards are respected.

Only the authorities of the Una-Sana and Sarajevo cantons are providing access to legal guardianship and facilitating access to education to unaccompanied children; over 570 unaccompanied children were registered; many remain not identified. Adequate accommodation does not suffice to address all the needs.

The number of third-country nationals returned to Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2019 under various readmission agreements amounted to 783, compared to 652 in 2018 and 324 in 2017. There are reports of violent collective expulsion (pushbacks) of migrants and asylum seekers back into Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Cooperation needs to be improved on identification and return procedures. In 2019, 329 foreigners were returned to neighbouring countries following readmission agreements (193 to Serbia, 136 to Montenegro), compared to 643 in 2018. Implementing these readmission agreements has become more challenging in the context of the increased migratory flow.

In 2019, 837 foreigners returned to their countries of origin via assisted voluntary return, compared to 735 in 2018.

Serious obstacles remain to ensure an effective access to asylum procedures. The Service for Foreigners’ Affairs and the Border Police have insufficient capacity, in terms of staff and facilities, to register asylum intents expressed upon entry in the country. This has been an issue since 2018.

The Sector for Asylum of the Ministry of Security has very limited human resources and operational capacity, with only four employees working on the registration and assessment of asylum claim; this is insufficient to ensure access to the asylum procedure to the increased number of asylum seekers across the country. The number of interviewers and registration sites is insufficient. Increasing human capacity, including interpreters and cultural mediators, is needed in order not to rely only on external international support.

The asylum legislation needs to be better implemented, in particular to ensure the systematic respect of procedural guarantees for asylum seekers. Their rights as asylum seekers are not guaranteed evenly across the country, as their access to services varies depending on the reception centres’ location. The access to asylum procedures and mechanisms should be strengthened to ensure faster processing of their claims and ensure that persons in need of international protection may receive it. As the authorities have not yet taken over the legal responsibility for the main reception centres in the Una-Sana Canton, these centres are not recognised as valid residential addresses for asylum applications; applicants thus fall in a legal limbo, with protection risks. The system for collecting and storing biometric identifiers requires additional improvements, especially for inter-agency information exchange.

In 2019, 784 individuals applied for international protection, of which 3 persons were granted the status of refugee (for the first time since 2014), 8 persons were granted subsidiary protection, 9 individual applications were rejected on merit, and 138 applications by 388 persons were closed as the applicants left or attempted to leave the country or failed to show up for an interview. As of mid-August 2020, only 180 persons applied or managed to apply for asylum in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2020, substantially less than the previous year.

As of June 2020, there are 30 asylum seekers in the Delijas centre.

The Border Police remains understaffed, with 412 vacant positions out of 2,646 (15.54%) at the end of 2019.

The IBM strategy for 2015-2018 failed to provide tools to effectively address the increased arrival of migrants and asylum seekers. Border surveillance resources remain very limited and require substantial improvements. The supervision of the green borders (outside the border crossing points) is not effective. The number of border patrols is insufficient, given the length of the border. Risk analysis-led border surveillance requires further improvement.

Bosnia and Herzegovina needs to sign and ratify the Frontex Status Agreement with the EU, initialled in January 2019.

Joint operational plans will then need to be developed with Frontex, providing for the deployment for European border and coast guard in the country at its border with the EU to carry out operational activities together with the country’s Border Police. Bosnia and Herzegovina participates in the Western Balkan Risk Analysis Network (WB-RAN) led by Frontex.

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, joint coordinated crisis response actions taken by agencies engaged on the borders of Bosnia and Herzegovina demonstrated good level of cooperation and coordination. Adequate measures undertaken by the Coordination Body for Protection and Rescue in Bosnia and Herzegovina implemented by the Border Police and other institutions and agencies contributed to a low number of infected individuals. Adequate border and customs control measures enabled the provision of essential goods and medical equipment in a crisis situation.